The judges gave higher scores in SS, TR, CH and IN and equal scores in PE. Was this so problematic?

Well I think part of the problem was Yu-na getting equal scores in P/E with Asada. From what I recalled. Yu-na had two major glaring! errors in her program, and in her last error Yu-na actually took her awhile to get up. It was lackluster on tv and, everyone who saw it live said she was lackluster.

In contrast, while Asada had an underrotated triple axel, it wasn't an obvious error to the naked eye. Asada's entire performance was quite sparkling. I'm frankly not sure who any one could argue that either Yu-na's execution OR her performance equaled Mao's. Asada was LEAGUES better in that area-on that night. Once again saying that Mao performed better than Yu-na on that night does not mean that Yu-na is some horrific skater, or even that Mao is normally the better skater. It just means on that night-Asada performed better. Don't get me wrong I can kind of understand Kim getting higher SS/choregraphy/transition marks. But Asada should have been WAY higher on Performance/Execution. For the judges to say that Asada's performance and Yu-na's performance were equal is frankly a slap in the face to Asada and the audience too. And if we really want to get into the whole mumble jumble of performance and execution doesn't mean performance and execution. I will point out that Mao's posture, lines, carriage has ALWAYS been better than Yu-nas. Mao has her strengths versus Yu-na. And for the record, I normally prefer Yu-na (I guess) or I quite adore Yu-na. So its not about me hating on Yu-na. Its about me hating on a system that somehow argues that the actual performance a skater puts out some how doesn't matter.
And its becoming clear to me the performance doesn't matter.

And I want to point out to part of the problem I had with what went down in Skate Canada, was the feeling that not only was Patrick Chan OVERSCORED, but that Oda and Adam Rippon were UNDERSCORED[/B]. For example at Skate America, Oda's PCS were about 5 points higher in the long program, than what he got at Skate Canada. And Oda was better at Skate Canada in the long than he was at Skate America. I actually thought Oda's pcs were too high at Skate America, as was Daisuke's but the overall gap between both, felt about right. (six points felt about right) [B]and notice Daisuke wasn't given a 10 point cushion over Oda in the long.

I can live with people being overscored, if its clear the judges are overscoring everyone. But when the judges are being overly generous for one, while being stingy for others, I'm sorry I call foul.

But the issue here is, is Chan truly better in all aspects of his skating and programs other than his falls? And he is so much more superior in all the other parts of his skating that he wins with 4 falls over other top skaters who skate relatively cleanly? .

I never proclaim Chan to be head and shoulder above his competitors in all aspects. Some aspects over some competitors maybe, definitely won't be comes GPF and Worlds when the best are together. It is about the total sum of all quantified elements and components on the particular day against the particular competitors. One can win by being a little better in most elements or head and shoulder above the rest in a few high scoring elements, like the quad kings do or feel they should do. As long as the positive points cancel out and exceed the deductions, one could win.

It's not hard to skate relatively clean. I could be cleaner than the World Champion you know. Unfortunately, or rather fortunately, that's not how a skating athlete is judged.

The thing is, many posters have pointed out areas in which Chan is most definitely NOT clearly head-and-shoulders above his competitors....that is why some of us have issues with his scoring

Unfortunately such opinions don't count in an ISU competition. Will work well in a reality show though, IF your opinion are with the majority.

FWIW, I accept and congratulate wins by skaters when they do the best by the rules on the day of the competition even if they are not my favorites. However, I choose to be a fan of skater whose skating I appreciate and enjoy the most, not based on wins and scoring. Some of my favorites will never win a major competition but Chan has what it takes to do so, fairly and by the rules.

And Janetfan, I knew I should have self corrected again as soon as I posted. (I'm almost paranoid about my every word and letter being taken literally if that offers an irresistable point to be pounced on.) I meant Chan gained points by fully rotating his jumps he fell on, especially the high scoring ones like 3A and 4T. When a skater falls on a non-elements, there is no other penalty besides the 1 point deduction, but it's a net loss. When one falls on a high scoring jump, the penalty is hefty, 4 points usually, but if fully rotated, it still offers a net gain, unlike if one falls on a low ranked jump, in which case, the net result would be a wipe-out or a negative.

As for revampting or tweaking the scoring system, I'm always weary of over reaction to a particular event or a person. There are often unintended consequences to deal with, prompting more changes or simply more rules (or laws by governments.) The Japanese Federation got the Asada rule they wanted and Mao lost more than her 3A. Joubert and his zealous fans demanded and got higher rewards and incentives for quads but now all top men have quads in various stages of competitive readiness, particularly the hated Patrick Chan. Yes Joubert fans hate Chan. They declare it often. And they rant and compare Joubert's scores to Chan's from a different competition, igoring his real competitors in the same event!

Oh, and there is a comparable example to Chan: Paul Wylie at US Nationals. OTOH, as well as Paul's basic skating being truly to die for, additionally his posture & turnout, especially in spread eagles and spirals, was amazing. And he was musical. Chan, not so much, particularly his posture in his sit & camel spin and his spread eagle.

I can live with people being overscored, if its clear the judges are overscoring everyone. But when the judges are being overly generous for one, while being stingy for others, I'm sorry I call foul.

I completely agree with this.

When you think about it, if Chan's skating skills are so superior to everyone else's, then he shouldn't be falling four times in every event.

Someone on another board wondered why Chan looked like "a deer in the headlights" when he started the CoR FS. Chan is not confident about landing the quad and the 3A, and he wasn't sure he'd be held up the way he had been on home ice at SC. Well, he shouldn't have worried, because if he hadn't messed up by doing one too many combos, he would have won despite the messy FS. I can't think of any other skater who has had a total of 8 falls in two events and still went home with a gold and a silver medal.

Oh, and there is a comparable example to Chan: Paul Wylie at US Nationals. OTOH, as well as Paul's basic skating being truly to die for, additionally his posture & turnout, especially in spread eagles and spirals, was amazing. And he was musical. Chan, not so much, particularly his posture in his sit & camel spin and his spread eagle.

Paul fell all over the place and scored high consistently, although he only made it to Worlds in some years and not in others.

Things were very different in Wylie's day. Olympic-eligible skaters were not allowed to skate for pay in shows. There were a few international competitions pre-GP (NHK, Lalique, Nationals Cup, etc.), but for most skaters Nationals, Worlds, and Olympics every 4 years was pretty much it. Wylie attended Harvard while he trained, which might explain to some extent why he wasn't technically top notch. He won Olympic silver the season after he had graduated from Harvard. But he was always the most elegant, expressive and musical of the US skaters during his eligible years, so if he was held up at US Nationals despite his jump issues, it was for good reason. But Paul was never US Champion: he was 2nd in 1988, 1990 and 1992, and third in 1989 and 1991.

But Paul was not held up when he skated internationally. He never finished higher than 9th at Worlds in three tries. In pre-GP international competitions, he won one gold medal (1988 Lalique), two silvers (1987 NHK, 1989 SC) and two bronze (1989 Nations Cup, 1991 SC). In that respect, he is not at all comparable to Chan.

Chan is highly regarded for his edging and speed, and excels at footwork, but he has technical lacunae (jumps) and he is not particularly expressive or musical. He has yet to skate two clean programs in the same event in international competition, mostly because he hasn't been able to achieve mastery of the 3A, yet he is consistently awarded gold and silver medals despite messy programs with multiple falls.

Wylie had the one outstanding event with clean performances and he was rewarded Olympic silver. Year after year, Chan turns in flawed performances yet still lands on the World podium.

It appears both Chan and Oda will compete against each other in the Finals. For the purposes of this discussion, we can see where the judges are coming from. It'll be the Battle of the Lyrical Skaters.

It appears both Chan and Oda will compete against each other in the Finals. For the purposes of this discussion, we can see where the judges are coming from. It'll be the Battle of the Lyrical Skaters.

Where the ISU judges are concerned, Chan doesn't have to battle against anyone. His gold medal has already been set aside at the Final and his name is already engraved. The other finalists are competing for silver and bronze.

this is the most bizarre thing i have read here, it is meant to be a joke?
All other technical elements marks besides jumps plus the program components are supposed to reflect the day of the skate on a given competition, ok we complain about pcs inflation and judging in corridors, but this is the combination of both!!! This solution is like having a best student that deserves A for his mathematical mind and the day of exam he falters but still gets an A because he is capable of it.

Plus skaters tend to improve their components once they feel more comfortable in a program as season goes by. Many skaters never skate to their full potential on a day of competition and if pcs were given so blatantly from a prejudged event ..I dont know..this is not a sport, this would be a circus.

Thanks for the compliment. I like to be bizarre.
As for your criticisms of my ideas--well, you are aslo criticizing the current judging system. If a skater is deemed to have superior edges (or whatever), and gets so many points for those edges that it doesn't matter if he messes up several jumps, this is already a prejudged circus event. If the performance on the day of the event counts, someone who falls three times shouldn't be on the podium unless everyone else falls four times.

My suggestion is just to make aboveboard what they are doing already--tell everyone that a particular skater is likely to get a certain amount of points for a particular program every time they skate (they can vary the points by a certain amount--for example if a skater skates more slowly than usual). It would be sort of like a start value in gymnastics. Someone with a harder vault can maybe take two steps and beat someone who did an easier vault but only took one step on the landing. If Patrick Chan's programs are that superior to and so much more difficult than that of seasoned veterans Jeremy Abbott and Tomas Verner, that he can execute his programs so badly and still beat them (although in this last competition Jeremy did poorly as well), then make that judging system more transparent.

There's something exciting about seeing a clean program win a top medal. There's something distressing about seeing a clean program beaten by a messy one. I'm about at the point where I don't want to watch anymore, and I love this sport. How many casual viewers will be turned off?

Unlike Takahashi, Patrick is frequently overscored in both TES and PCS. His GOE are nearly always overly generous.

This is such a general statement. Frequently? Nearly always? For SC and CoR, in examining the score sheets, where and how exactly was Chan scored incorrectly in TES? Under the rules, where was he not marked down appropriately? I agree PCS is much more difficult to monitor. Again, what really constitutes a 7 vs 8 vs 9? But where would you have put the scores?

Here's a thought on Verner. What happens if say at the GPF, he skates well but doesn't do the quad and earns a pretty good placement, say 3rd - will he leave out the quad for the rest of the season? If he can continue to skate clean he probably doesn't need it for Europeans to win a medal (maybe even gold), and then if he doesn't do it there idk if he would try it for the first time at Worlds. I think he said he was going to try the quad at the GPF, and I hope he does, but I can't help but wonder if he doesn't do it their and manages to do pretty well for himself, if he will change his current gameplan.

And no this does not mean he is turning into Lysacek I'm just speculating. Plus if he manages to get a big PCS boost ala Lysacek he might feel he doesn't need the quad...

I think great results without quads will totally make the Verner pledges to do quads totally irrelevent. But he will never say it. He will always be "adding a quad in the future." He has already won a competition!

Verner already changed his combination since CoC to 3lz-3t in the SP b/c of the flip edge call. I wouldn't be surprised if he changed his jump out of steps to a 3lo at the GPF now that it's worth essentially the same as a flip and he usually gets good GOE on his loop and can't get an edge call on it. He also said he might try the quad at at GPF because he has nothing to lose. I highly doubt he will put the quad in his SP this season, but I do think he may try it in the FS. His opening now is 3lz-3t right, so it's probably designed that he could do 4t-3t there instead and if he falls he adds the 3t to some other jump. Also if he does the quad then he could replace the 3f-2t-2lo combo at the end with a 3lz-2t-2lo combo and not have the do the flip which he gets edge calls on. Most skaters practice a few different arrangements of their programs so they can be ready to adapt in competition depending on what happens.

Verner's current layout is:

3lz-3t
3a-2t
3lo
x 3a
x 3lz
x 3s
x 2a
x 3f-2t-2lo

So the layout with the quad is likely

4t-3t
3a-2t
3lo
x 3a
x 3lz
x 3s
x 2a
x 3lz-2t-2lo

And if he falls on the quad or doesn't do it in combination he could do:

4t
3a-2t
3lo
x 3a
x 3lz
x 3s-3t
x 2a
x 3lz-2t-2lo

I tend to think he will eventually attempt the quad this season because if he does he can replace the flip combo at the end with a lutz combo and not get an edge call for it. He always did the quad before so I don't know why he would just abandon it now, especially where he was scored pretty stingily at CoC and in the SP here. I think the GPF will be telling. At Europeans I wonder if he might not do the quad just because he probably doesn't need it there to win a medal, and maybe the title. Worlds I tend to think he would go for it just because he probably realizes he's a bit of a longshot for a medal as is and the quad could make a big difference.

I read the second layout and would like to see that! I am going be really anxious about his free skate at the GPF when it is his turn.

I read the second layout and would like to see that! I am going be really anxious about his free skate at the GPF when it is his turn.

I'd like to see him do the 2nd layout too, if he can do it come worlds that would be very competitive for a medal. I'm not too worried about the GPF, it sounds like he wasn't expecting to go and doesn't really have expectations for himself there. I guess the only thing I maybe worry about there is if he has the SOHL, because it might mean he won't be able to have it again at Euros and Worlds when he needs/wants it most. But it seems like he's gotten much more consistent, so I think he'll be ok. I'd love to see him try the quad at the GPF, but even if he doesn't, I'm just happy to see him doing so well. It made me so sad last season to see him so sad and sick and upset.

Seems to me that Patrick and Dai both have some exceptional skills.
What I am honestly missing from this scoring system is how can Dai fall once and be placed third while Patrick can fall four times and be placed first.

I see a few areas where Patrick is better than Dai - just as I see areas where Dai is better than Patrick.

OT:
Your comparison has triggered my interest for the matter. So I went back and checked Patrick's SC 2010 and Dai's Olympics 2010's results.

Dai had wonderful SP, and got 90.25. Patrick fell three times in his SP and got 73.20.

From their results, I don't see that the judges were particularly favoring Patrick Chan. Their PCS were almost identical in a one fall LP. The differences were that the Jump values are up this season. Dai had two downgrades which really hurted him in the TES. Chan got 6.79 higher in base value in TES also benefit from getting full credit for the 3A he fell. Though Chan got 6.14 on GOE. Dai got 3.20 GOE. Chan's GOE was 2.94 higher. However, SC silver medalist Oda's score was 236.52. Three points lower than Chan's 239.52. If we minus 2.94 on Chan's score, he was still 0.06 point higher than Oda. Bearly but it was not the factor that Chan was favored over Dai, therefore Chan was first but Dai was third.

My conclusion is that Chan is, indeed, a technician kind of skater. His program is the most CoP friendly program. Of course he is a judges' favor but he's not the only one that the judges favored, as several of you have already said. If we want to change the 3 fall or 4 fall cushions, we have to change the scoring system again. The judges have all learned to focus on and focus only on the little fractionalized details of each program. They have no control of and been taught not to control over the whole situation. With such a system, this is the result.

I'm actually starting to feel sympathized to Chan. He is like a victim of the CoP. Being targeted and angried by so many figure skating fans and very possibly by many in the field.